from pacific children result in schools. in israel lottie's available in some of them hotels have various sort of in her till jerusalem. we don't risk u.s. default. on our obligations. because we can't put politics aside the politics sure have not stopped washington from flirting with the deadline with more failed debt talks over the weekend what would really happen if the u.s. does default. and friends with benefits as corporate leaders cuddle up to a politician today at the chamber of commerce jobs summit why is a good job still so hard to find. from tanks are going to aid exactly who are u.s. police serving and protecting with stockpiles of military hardware. that it will

let you know who was there you know. who was there was no clue so we're in a murder. but the mainstream media sure think she does so what's with the royal flush and the prince visited the real popper's. good afternoon it's monday july eleventh four pm here in washington d.c. i'm lauren lyster and your watching r t well the big question the million dollar question is the united states three weeks away from financial collapse well we don't know but that's what some argue the u.s. is getting closer to with its failure to raise the country's fourteen point three trillion dollars debt ceiling now despite another week of failed debt talks between lawmakers president obama had a press conference today and he is still pushing for a big long term solution here's what he said. i'm happy to consider all options all

alternatives that they're looking at the things that i will not consider. are a thirty day or a sixty day or a ninety day four hundred eighty day. temporary stopgap resolution to this problem this is the united states of america and we don't manage our affairs here in three month increments. year we don't risk u.s. default. on our obligations. because we can't put politics aside this coming from officials who haven't been able to put politics aside in missing past deadlines and who are trying to agree on all of this a big plan to tackle the deficit just three weeks before default international investors that's the chinese and ratings agencies we've already seen them concerned obama and many other lawmakers say washington needs to raise the debt ceiling

period but what happens if it doesn't oh peter schiff president of euro pacific capital joins us now to help us try to make sense of all this peter now you for one we've talked about this before you are one that argues for lower lower corporate taxes in this country that's something we've seen republicans want in this negotiation over the scope of it and also you have said that the government it's a rein in its deficit such as something that both democrats and republicans seem to want on this deal so my question for you is would you risk the u.s. defaulting on its debt in order to achieve some of these principles. first of all i think this is a ruse i mean the fact that we're talking about the fault at all really proves that the fall was inevitable eventually if then surely the only question is what form does the fall take and when does it happen but if the president was really concerned about the fault if congress was concerned about the ball what they would be saying is don't worry there is no way we will stop making payments on our debt we will cut everything else first we'll cut so security we'll cut medicare we will prioritize interest payments and principal payments on the national that if they

said that this would be a risk they only want to use the specter of the fall so that they can have a justification for raising the debt ceiling the reality is the best thing that we can do for this country is not raise the debt ceiling and maybe of congress votes down the debt ceiling increase the stock market might sell off just like the ways sold off when the congress originally rejected the tarp but that was the right thing to do and often times the markets make the wrong move in a knee jerk reaction but if you really are concerned about that wasn't spending which i am the only way to stop it is to stop it get in its tracks so these are just excuses that the government is making and and first of all we have precedence for default we give all that and i did seventy one you know if you own a u.s. treasury bond in one hundred seventy for every thirty five dollars you had the united states government has to give you one ounce of gold and then the fall put on that promise we told our creditors we're not going to give you any gold for your

treasures and it was a catastrophic result that was a nine hundred seventy it was a runaway stagflation the price of oil went up ten fold because we defaulted on that promise well here's my question to you now what would happen if we did default because people really don't know what would happen in this situation in this current economy and where the united states relies on people to buy u.s. treasuries here's i want to play a little bit of what the president said at the effect of being an american people possibly today at a press conference that first. and if you said to the american people is it a good idea for the united states not to pay its bills and potentially create a nother recession they could throw millions of more people out of work i feel pretty confident i can get a majority on my side on that one and that's the fact if we don't raise the debt ceiling and we see a crisis of confidence in the markets. and suddenly interest rates are going up

significantly and everybody is paying higher interest rates on their car loans on their mortgages on their credit cards and that's sucking up a whole bunch of additional money out of the pockets and murdered people i promise you they won't like that so another recession interest rates going higher crossed the board for americans are these consequences that you see being the consequences of default at the united states doesn't reach an agreement to raise the debt ceiling that we're we're going to the recession regardless you know we're good we're on it we're still in a depression but. the default is not an automatic consequence of not raising the debt ceiling the governess collecting over two trillion dollars a year in taxes i think the interest payments on the national debt are actually three hundred billion a year much are the exact number but we have roughly ten times the money we need so the only way we will default on our obligations right now we might do it eventually but the only way we're default in august is if congress and the president choose to

do that because there is plenty of money and you know it's because the president obama obama is making right now that's what's threatening our congress because he is telling bondholders that they are the low man on the totem pole you don't want to see because ok ok i hear you're saying how is the if you saying that you know everybody's saying that the debt ceiling has to be raising us cannot just fall isn't that because aiming to reassure markets is not reassuring anybody he is telling our creditors the minute we cannot borrow any more money we will stop paying back the money we've already borrowed you see the debt ceiling is about a self-imposed borrowing limit but what happens when our creditors impose a lending limit what happens when china says i'm on the ledge you any more money then what we were already told what happened then we're going to fall then we're not going to pay back any of the money that you've already loaned us we are saying to the whole world this is a gigantic ponzi scheme what the president should be say what. congress should be

saying is we will honor our debts don't worry at all there is no chance of default we will make cars in other spending but that's not what we're saying we are telling our creditors that people who get social security checks are more important people who buy u.s. treasuries are today are they are they are americans who rely on social security more important to america than on holders their investors and us that of course they are and they're more important to politicians because foreigners don't vote that's why they should not be saying that this is very dangerous for the president to admit how weak the vision is for our foreign creditors that we will pass them aside demitted pay interest on the debt conflicts was making so security payments with the dollar was backed by gold when we promised to pay gold people knew they would always get value for their creditors because we were going to pay them in gold but when we defaulted in the one nine hundred seventy one they don't promise to pay anything of value so the only thing that gives treasuries value is the

belief that we are going to have a sound monetary policy but basically what the president said just the minute we have a problem we're not going to get any money or just the great mass of inflation and you're not going to give the purchasing power i want to ask you i want to bring in a little bit of the global situation as we see it today because today we see a demand for the dollar we see the dollar rising and they concerned over the euro zone now fresh concerns over a sovereign debt crisis in italy you see treasuries have very low yields below three percent showing that people are willing to not get a lot of return on investment in order to hold u.s. treasury so this kind of the news in the euro zone and the bad news coming out of the girls zone is not good news for u.s. lawmakers who are delayed yelling over the debt ceiling about what they think first of all it's not the dollar that's rising it's the euro that it's all in and so it looks like the dollar is rising and so you look at the price of gold which is a strongly faded a record high in terms of euro's it's almost at

a raw. in terms of dollars i think will be at a record high shortly so yes right now the euro to some people looks less ugly than the dollar that's not how it looks to me but you're right we are getting some more rope that we can hang ourselves with because the world is now focusing more on the problems in europe and ignoring the greater problems in the united states what about going back to the gold standard what you're saying earlier about that that's what parliament is one that later this year is expected to talk about creating a gold franc raising the possibility that puts her land that was actually won a lot of bad on the gold standard could take a test step towards returning to it how would that affect the united states and with economy but it would be good for switzerland i mean switzerland is probably the strongest terms in the world right now and are to be one of the best economies in the world low unemployment strong export strong growth so i think anything that they can do to strengthen their currency will strengthen their economy and i think that would be a step in the right direction and i think you can see all around the world there is

a movement to return to real money myself i have a bank that like i started offshore bank called europe a big bank and i'm very close to launching the world's first ever ball back credit card visa card that my depositors could use the access to their gold bullion and i think this is a trend that is going to continue as people lose confidence in currencies and want to save in real money and friends back in real money but have the impact on the united states. well i think anything that diminishes the appeal of the dollar is going to impact the united states just remember our economy in america right now is based on printing money that cost us nothing and then using it to buy all the resources and all the goods that the rest of the world produces at great cost and so anything that shines a light on the fact that we're just counterfeiting money and anything that looks more appealing than the dollar and then it is our ability to pull off a scam and really quickly get to go back to what we talked about the beginning of

a conversation that i just want to get an answer because you said you don't that the united states would actually default if it doesn't raise the debt ceiling that there are options for the u.s. to pay the people that oh it's so in a situation where the united states doesn't raise the debt ceiling do you think that what need to happen is to pay creditors and feel the pain at home i mean what is the scenario you would. ultimately my advice for the u.s. is going to the saying that a given for greece right now or ireland for that matter we can't pay for let's just acknowledge it you see what's going to happen eventually is u.s. interest rates are going to rot they're not going to be zero forever they're going to rise sharply just like they're rising right now in italy just like they rose in greece and ireland and when interest rates go up we cannot it doesn't matter whether we raise the debt so we could really could eliminate the debt ceiling nobody is going to want to lend to us and we're not a little for to do it because the interest payments are going to be so hard so eventually in order to avoid massive inflation we're going to have to restructure the debt we're going to have to cut back on what we pay in principal and interest

and yes i think that's better than imposing massive austerity on the american economy so we can pay off our foreign creditors wanted our foreign creditors ultimately deserve to lose money because they're stupid enough to buy all these treasuries and and the government is using all that money to undermine the u.s. economy i would you accept that correction happening on august second if the united states didn't write that step dealing with all the talk that the u.s. is going to have defaulting would you accept that scenario. well i'm if the congress really dug in their heels and said we are not going to have anymore debt and we're going to restructure. the debt or we're going to allow the economy words to restructure we're going to cause government spending dramatically so that we can yes i would love to see that happen i mean that's not what i'm betting on i want a lot of gold because i don't think that's going to happen i don't think there's any chance that politicians will do the right thing that's why my money is on the fact that they will do the wrong thing which is raise the debt ceiling and keep on

borrowing and printing money until they collapse with all right we're grappling with that thank you so much peter schiff as always a pleasure hitter president of euro pacific capital. now in all of the debt the efforts on capitol hill all of the debt talks where is the talk of jobs and it's we cannot forget that june jobs report that came out friday showing unemployment is getting worse well jobs talks are happening now but you can decide if it sounds like it will help meeting today about jobs is the chairman of the president's council on jobs and competitiveness who is c.e.o. of g.e. jeff immelt now he's also known for heading g.e. that company that famously paid no taxes last year and shed u.s. jobs are adding them overseas under his reign and it's at the chamber of commerce which is one of the largest business lobbies in washington who the obama administration has also butt heads with in the past here to talk about this is labor journalist mike my thanks for being here so you have him all to have the chamber of commerce you have also politicians what what they want as far as

jobs what is the goal for them when it comes to job creation to keep this few workers employed as possible and keep them working as much as possible and through little as possible that's the only change these people have no real desire for humans they see human capital with nearly another commodity not something that they really see any social bosal and they don't have much interest in job creation but the we need one over the long run if they want to sell one of the products but i think increasingly what you're seeing in the u.s. is that a lot of companies feel that they don't have to invest in american because the global markets are expanding well yet you have little classes that are burgeoning in brazil and india they can buy you know washing machines or whatever g.e. products but come on this is him and he is the jobs are those who want to create jobs i mean other plants i mean i mean he has a plan but if you look at his plan for d. industries asian in america you have to remember his mentor jack welch is the head of g.e. said you know i wish you could put factories on a barge that you could ship from anywhere around the world where really rich

cheapest and you know more has continued in the tradition of the scene see g.e. shipped twenty nine jobs overseas a twenty nine. plants since obama's taking office and thousands of jobs and thousands of jobs and on top of that he just got you know huge wage cuts to workers at general electric as part of their unit go shushan so i really don't think jim was a credible person and i wonder why the president is even working well let's switch gears and talk a little bit about then job creation and industrialization in this country we have seen a little bit of a rise in auto manufacturing we've seen a little bit of a rebound and i'm curious you know some of this job creation some of these plants for example you see foreign companies foreign automakers coming over volkswagen they opened a plant in tennessee last month two thousand workers were hired that's an example why do you think they opened their plant in tennessee versus say detroit where there's a trained workforce or automakers were part of the reason they did it was the massive amounts of infrastructure investment pretty good there and kind of see i

mean massive amounts of quitting stimulus money to open that plant which is which is really ironic since there senator bob corker who advocated against the stimulus advocated for the stimulus money for that plan all right but what about growing system i did some of these rates knowing that it's you know newer than that why companies would go to a state like that as opposed to someone like that's right yeah it's nonunion but the interesting thing is that has already signaled its willingness to the united auto workers to live in for you new election happening so there's a lot of interest in talk folks who are going to the only foreign auto maker in this country that doesn't screen out members that were previously union members so we're going to germany has always had a pro labor rights record and the last four to employ it was in america in greensburg pennsylvania this was in the eighty's my mother actually worked there was a union shop or a volkswagen has always been able to have a union shop so i don't think that's a huge part of the u.k. but it's not just books are going to mean there are other automakers that open plants in it right to work states you see an opening in the south i feel like you see more of a trend there and there's also evidence that shows that you know job creation and

employment rise as more and right to work states so i want to i'm sure you're going to house on. say about that but i want to bring in what's going on with boeing and then you see the national labor relations board ruling essentially that boeing cannot move its production from washington to south carolina would this set a new precedent you know this has been the precedent since the one nine hundred thirty s. i mean this has been for some for other places you said if this goes through in another interview that it would be groundbreaking it would be groundbreaking because i didn't force much so this isn't force it would be groundbreaking it was everything forced by huge me being corporation like boeing it's been force against of the other ones which is that companies cannot be tolerated against workers for moving their production to other places because you workers moment straight which is what happened in the boeing case you know boeing promised to move production in two thousand and seven two thousand and eight work was going on straight two thousand and nine but we move production of south carolina and said in an interview to the seattle times that the reason they moved it was because they didn't have to

do with work structures so if this isn't forced and if this is groundbreaking what would that mean for businesses in the united states would this be a hamper to economic growth and job growth well i think the biggest hamper to economic growth for the answer my question and not the biggest number i want to know what impact that rolling specifically would have on job growth and business growth in the united states because why wouldn't going say ok we'll forget doing business in the u.s. we'll just go overseas we're first up bones contractually obligated to make a lot of its parts here since the good side of the government contracts but it's not all of all of us manufacturing isn't required to be here i mean if you look great in a lot of parts of our benefactor d n a lot of it's moving already but a lot of the manufacturing that stay here you know i think you just can't enforce the bone decision i think we have to have a serious industrial policy that keeps the plants from overseas and anybody that does business with the federal government which is just about every company and of those parts should be in the u.s. every other nation and germany france they all have these type of industrial policies and look at germany they're running a trade surplus right now with china will really want to trade deficit and german

workers made more than american workers make you know the average american auto worker makes thirty six dollars german auto worker makes. forty eight dollars oil that's when the arguments of life foreign companies along with the u.s. dollar being weak or why they move production here is because they don't have they can have the new union labor they can have cheaper labor but my question to you is with this boeing rolling and with the kind of those policies do they have is it better to have you know less regulation lower no less million power war opportunity and right to work states because of the situation the economy is in where jobs are so desperately needed i think the answer is an easy one if you look at the childhood poverty rates of the right to work states in the south and much higher than anywhere in the united states i would say that's good but how can you link poverty with whether it's a right to work state or not because workers make less than a right to work states have less money to give their families but those four implants they mean according to what i've read they match their wages to what u.a.w. wages are and they cited you know u.a.w.

wages that they've had to negotiate lower wages which is fourteen dollars which is half of what it used to be it's a tradition that has to expand to union states as well well i mean i think what you're looking at here is so you don't have any of the pension costs that there are and they don't have companies that built them in that way so we have we do that in some cases not sure but if you look over all of the general trends roadworks that you know manufacturing carmakers are highly skilled industry so you have to pay workers a decent wage but if you look at other areas in the south they have very they also have very high property ridge and there's a direct correlation so i mean you can use that the auto industry which has to pay workers a certain week because a school is unfair. we got to go but just really quickly i mean is having a job in this economy better than having you know low wages having any job better than having you know what i think i'm just saying is it better to have a job in this situation even if it's a low paying than having no job. well i think that's you know a false choice i think we can have both good jobs and good wages in this country

and plenty of other industrialized nations do it so i think any country can do all right we have to leave it at that thank you so much that was labor journalist michael. now it's a little bit away from the economy and towards government and defense by have pella paramilitary swat raids increased by more than a thousand percent over the last few decades why has the department of defense giving millions of military weapons and armored carriers to civilian police forces across the country well joining me now to help us figure that out is independent journalist rania colic who investigated this in a recent article of her thanks so much for being with me so one of the first things that i noticed by your article that you go through it is a really interesting history of was from eight hundred seventy eight where it was you could not have military involvement in civilian police force to now where you see video de basically getting weapons and grants to local police so how is there a distinction still between military and civilian so you saying it is i guess my

first question well there's a little bit of a distinction about but basically what happened in swat teams is kind of goes back to when swat teams were first in fact she did back in sixty is. unusually swat teams were in reaction to deal with hijackings and and bank robberies and hostage situations where you needed sort of extreme force to come in and kill the situation and they were pretty popular throughout the seventy's because they weren't used very often they were only used when they were really need it but have throughout the eighty's and ninety's there was a series of law that were implemented beginning under the reagan administration that kind of loosened. the common tatis which is the law that really and good military doing any civilian police think kind of loosen that law and and sort of came up with means that the military and civilian law enforcement could collaborate and train together when dealing with the war on drugs and as

a result now there's like forty six percent of small teams are actually are actually trained active duty military personnel. in fresh operation so there's also the surplus the military surplus program that was celebrated brought the eighty's and ninety's where you got a great man from the military that would no longer use give and use that long course so it was some of the stuff is like that and you know and i like that and there's also armored personnel vehicles and machine guns and lots of helicopters in some cases so you have a situation where local law enforcement has not been trained by the military but it's also dressing up like the military it's weaponized like the military is it's a little you know really good i mean getting around your cars because i want to have a bit more of a discussion about this one of the arguments for this kind of militarization is to protect police death and violence against police is something that you mention in your article so what is wrong with that that justification and you seem to believe

there is one well there's nothing wrong with wanting to protect police and of course they should be protected however a lot of people try to make the case that we need to militarize the police because filings against lead authors have gone up astronomically in this actually isn't the case in fact of violence violent crime in america gone down upon a downward trend and on top of that the f.b.i. collects data and you will be interested in the uniform crime report about how many police officers are actually been killed and assaulted and that number has to be pretty constant is that she's got to look back it's been around fifty police officers that year that have been killed and i mean it's not good but at the same time that's not increasing but that's been going on over the last decade and you argue that this militarisation has been going on for longer than apple a several decades along with the violent crime and can you make the case that it is this militarization that has decreased this violence against police and the violence overall well that's i mean that's not the case because again like again

violent crime is gone down and violence against police has pretty bad and been pretty much constant. at the same time. but but not go because of the militarization and well what teams and what to actually go to that's a good case to make but the fact is that swat teams in the tradition of police actually escalate violence rather than deescalate it which is apparently the idea of it because you have a heavily armed police. swat team raiding people's homes all the time you know a lot of instances where people believe their homes are being broken into and somebody might a gun owner might pick up their gun and try and protect themselves and not lead to somebody getting killed usually the person who's being raided so they're in there in there haven't been any correlation between the idea that militarizing the police force has led to what police being killed and in fact people end up getting killed and hurt in the process. but what's really disturbing about this most of all is that if you're members of the police the civilian police and military soldiers have

very different functions. the police officers that serve their communities are there to maintain that the and and peace in our communities and force the law but at the same time there's uphold the rights of citizens as by medical right on the other hand a soldier in the military is an agent of war this train to eliminate their enemy so when you are giving this military mindset language and weapons and uniforms to civilian law enforcement sensually turning law enforcement into into a group of soldiers and you know the enemies are going to eliminate or going to the american people and read a book about this is something that's been going on for a while we all know i just one sentence ten seconds you're the police commissioner what do you do. well you know there's other ways to train police to deal with situations and having them heavily armed but the subdivision guns and blackhawk helicopters is not the way to go about it all right we're going to be able to actually keep this discussion going so you say that there is a bit they're going to have to go against this and they're going to train people

differently and are kind of going to have to kind of undo that but one of the things you mention is that whole industry has been built up around these police agencies similar to the military industrial complex that we see on a federal level all at the local level you say that there is now all of this industry around it so i'm curious how much influence they have and what tactic that is for uses in perpetuating this paramilitary expansion of police forces right well that what you're talking about is the department of homeland security after the war on terror what they do is they give out grants you just grants to local police departments every year and police officers or you i mean these apartments are using these grants to buy military not military but the policing equipment so yeah this industry has sort of popped up. the manufacturing going back first to make paramilitary here that actually you advertise to local police forces because they could spot teams so so yeah it becomes sort of this complex where now you've got the movie industry that has oversimple and you know is telling machine guns and

tank like you know vehicle to local police department and of course local these parents because of thousands of dollars in grants what are they going to use them for to buy this equipment so i'm not really sure how you reverse that we can't really reverse that it's more of a congressional thing as the you know that have to go through congress. and really a comprehensive study of this new sort of law enforcement criminal justice complex hasn't really been done of these of these companies so we don't really know the extent to which you know they have influence and just and just really quickly i want to know if you think that there's a connection between this militarization and is it in response yes or no to the fact that u.s. citizens are armed. u.s. citizens of all we've been armed so no it's not a response that you know i'm all for you know gun laws but it's that's not the reason why this is happening all right well thank you so much for joining us your assessment of what is going on i was independent journalist ron your colic. and that is going to do it for now from one of the stories we covered go to our t.v. dot.